The Hypocrisy of the west

After being crowned with the title of rape capital of the world, recently India also got the title of land of intolerance. Following Dadri incident, there was widespread reporting on growing intolerance in India both in domestic and international media and how Hindus have become intolerant in a year since they elected BJP to power at the national level. Since Dadri, which was an isolated incident in a country of 1.2 billion people, was used to define Hindu society and India by the west, let us analyse what standard they follow in their own backyard. To summarize, western media and their leaders are just a bunch of hypocrites and hardly the role model to sermonize others. In the next few paragraphs we will list the scale of intolerance afflicting the west which has no parallels in India. First, we will look at beacon of morality i.e. western Europe and then look at current developments in US.

Lets first look at France, the country which banned Hijab few years ago. French Corsican riots: recently, there was a massive anti-Muslim rally in the French province of Corsica. Here, the “tolerant protesters” vandalised the mosques and attacked the Muslims. But western media ran this story for three days before forgetting that such an incident ever happened. There was no constant whining of intolerance and racism by far right wing etc in the media there nor was there 24/7 news coverage for the victims(Corsican Muslims) for 3 months. There was no advice against Islamophobia nor any sermons on religious tolerance to French by any major leader like Obama did to Indians when he visited India. The above attack should be seen in the broader context of emergence of Front National i.e. conservative far right wing party in France which won approximately one-third of the votes in the recent municipal elections.

UK is not far behind and recently passed a law to officially monitor the Muslims and mosques of UK. There was no call for intolerance debate, no constant blitz on growing far right in UK or call from other countries to restrict the visa for UK’s prime minister. The news ran for two days before the media there conveniently found other pressing issues to focus on rather than discuss this official spying of 5% of their own population.

In Cologne, following the sexual assaults on German women by the immigrant Muslims on New Year’s eve, their mayor advised their women to stay away from strangers and blamed the victims for the horrors they faced. But even here, their media was quick to categorize this as a bad opinion of just one woman but somehow, when one or two random Indian rapists think women ought to be blamed for rape, it somehow becomes the opinion of the entire nation and feminists from UK come to India to make documentary on Indian women while they have a rape rate which is 20 times worse than India. Even more hypocritical is the negligence on part of big media organizations in Europe as they took more than a week to report Cologne attacks when it became impossible to suppress this news. One would wonder to what extent these countries can go to condone rapes to support their government policies.

The developments from across the Atlantic are not less hypocritical either. Recently, Donald Trump, the leading republican presidential nominee called for total ban on Muslims entering their country, even though Muslims form less than 1% of their population. Ever since he announced such a proposal he has been gaining popularity in the polls and has now built a huge momentum around his ban Muslims statement. This rhetoric has been taken to the point where he chose this statement to lead his election ad campaign. And of course, he has been criticised by the media to a large extent, but again no one wants to blame the American Christian society and instead try to blame it on the lone man Trump, even though it is pretty clear that his ideas that Muslims should be banned from entering USA resonates very well in their society. But for some reason, the western media doesn’t seem to think their society is intolerant even though it is pretty clear from the polls and surveys that more than 50% of the Americans view Muslims unfavourably and an equal number want them banned. Yet, Obama for some reason has more reason to sermonize India on tolerance than tend to the growing intolerance and racism in his own country as evidenced by the black lives matter movement.

If these incidents are any indication, it is pretty clear that most of the westerners are rank hypocrites who have no morals other than their own best interests at heart. A good example is the way they treat themselves let alone outsiders like Indians. For instance, UK, which is the same country which passed a legal resolution to officially spy (or monitor as their media and govt. euphemistically put it) their Muslims, has no problem or hypocrisy contemplating ban on Donald Trump for his anti Muslim comments. This is also the reason why Obama thinks that India needs lessons on intolerance when their own govt. has unofficially sanctioned racial profiling under the garb of security and when their own presidential election front runner asks for blanket ban on Muslim entry to USA .

India recognised Christmas as official holiday when Christian population was less than 1%. Contrast it with the western world which has a Hindu population of more than 1% today and yet no country in the west has recognised Diwali as an official holiday. For these people tolerance and freedom of religion are just excuses which they use for spreading their own religion and culture. Modi govt. and Hindus became intolerant after the Modi govt. banned foreign NGOs involved in subverting Hindus and converting them to Christianity and stalling development projects. They use freedom of religion and this fake tolerance debate as a tool to further their agenda and is nothing more than cultural and ideological imperialism.

So its high time Indians stopped seeking western approval for their actions on what is best for them. It is time for India to pay them back in their own currency and make documentaries on intolerance in UK or Sweden, the rape capital of the world. But there is also a lesson to be learnt from these hypocritical standards of the west- protect national interest at all cost and subvert other nations through information war. For eg. Islam is seen as a problem in all these nations which led to the current surveillance law in UK. India should also actively seek to fight this Islamic menace and not shy away from hard questions and laws instead of going soft on fanatics to polish its tolerant image in the eyes of the western ayatollahs, who as shown above perfectly fit the description of the emperor without clothes.

The Western media is here not to be objective or tell the truth but to spread a story, to sell a narrative. They will pitch things in a way that sells the most papers. The average western reader loves to read stories about how primitive, backwards and savage the "barbarians" of the non-Western nations are. They also enjoy things like "poverty-porn", because such things make them feel good about themselves and their lives.

Right now the problem is, that the average Indian handles this situation as poorly as possible. World renowned Indian scientists want to protest the teaching of non-scientific things such as Ayurvedic medicine at a science fair (a valid goal), but then like an idiot he slams it the worst way possible to the world media, a method that will confirm their biases about Indians and be taken the worst possible way. The world press isn't going to sell the story in a way that makes readers think "hmm he had a valid point", all they will read is "Top Indian scientist confirms Indians are backwards and stupid and don't even have science in their science fairs." People who want to protest rape think, "I better scream loud and use radical extreme claims to get local attention", "all Indian men are rapists", "women have no rights in India", not thinking that while their tactics might work to get local attention, they are sabotaging the nation and its reputation in front of the whole world and now when Indian men go out in public or try to date someone's daughter, that dark reputation will follow them.

We Indians, and I mean ALL Indians across the world need to remember that we are all ambassadors for our people. I'm very careful in the way I act and talk to give Indians the best possible reputation and to fight stereotypes. When someone says, "your English is very good", I think "how can I reply to leave the best impression for Indians". I don't reply with "thanks well actually I moved here when I was 5", I'll say something like, "well India's population is bigger than all of Europe and North America combined, so some parts of India speak English very well." An answer like that causes the westerner to think "hmm I thought all Indians had that funny apu quickymart accent, I guess many of them must be smart and well educated in English too." When I post pictures on Facebook of my trips to India, knowing 100's of non-Indian friends will be looking too, I post only pictures that show it in a positive light, full of culture, ancient traditions and beauty, and avoid pictures of slums and beggars.

First we Indians need to get our act together and we conscious about our image, we need to not only do it ourselves but teach fellow Indians we see behaving badly in public. "Oh bhai you need to tip when you go to a restaurant, or every Indian starts getting treated like a second class citizen the waiter is disappointed to be stuck serving." Second because the media wants to sell the most papers, this trait can actually be exploited for our benefit. We can sell narratives that makes a great story and go viral in the media, but are positive for our reputation. "That noble peaceful democratic nation of Gandhi heroically fighting the front line on Muslim terrorism, they share our values, they are just like us!"

The Western media is here not to be objective or tell the truth but to spread a story, to sell a narrative. They will pitch things in a way that sells the most papers. The average western reader loves to read stories about how primitive, backwards and savage the "barbarians" of the non-Western nations are. They also enjoy things like "poverty-porn", because such things make them feel good about themselves and their lives.

Right now the problem is, that the average Indian handles this situation as poorly as possible. World renowned Indian scientists want to protest the teaching of non-scientific things such as Ayurvedic medicine at a science fair (a valid goal), but then like an idiot he slams it the worst way possible to the world media, a method that will confirm their biases about Indians and be taken the worst possible way. The world press isn't going to sell the story in a way that makes readers think "hmm he had a valid point", all they will read is "Top Indian scientist confirms Indians are backwards and stupid and don't even have science in their science fairs." People who want to protest rape think, "I better scream loud and use radical extreme claims to get local attention", "all Indian men are rapists", "women have no rights in India", not thinking that while their tactics might work to get local attention, they are sabotaging the nation and its reputation in front of the whole world and now when Indian men go out in public or try to date someone's daughter, that dark reputation will follow them.

We Indians, and I mean ALL Indians across the world need to remember that we are all ambassadors for our people. I'm very careful in the way I act and talk to give Indians the best possible reputation and to fight stereotypes. When someone says, "your English is very good", I think "how can I reply to leave the best impression for Indians". I don't reply with "thanks well actually I moved here when I was 5", I'll say something like, "well India's population is bigger than all of Europe and North America combined, so some parts of India speak English very well." An answer like that causes the westerner to think "hmm I thought all Indians had that funny apu quickymart accent, I guess many of them must be smart and well educated in English too." When I post pictures on Facebook of my trips to India, knowing 100's of non-Indian friends will be looking too, I post only pictures that show it in a positive light, full of culture, ancient traditions and beauty, and avoid pictures of slums and beggars.

First we Indians need to get our act together and we conscious about our image, we need to not only do it ourselves but teach fellow Indians we see behaving badly in public. "Oh bhai you need to tip when you go to a restaurant, or every Indian starts getting treated like a second class citizen the waiter is disappointed to be stuck serving." Second because the media wants to sell the most papers, this trait can actually be exploited for our benefit. We can sell narratives that makes a great story and go viral in the media, but are positive for our reputation. "That noble peaceful democratic nation of Gandhi heroically fighting the front line on Muslim terrorism, they share our values, they are just like us!"

Click to expand...

You sound confused as well. You really think Ayurveda is non-scientific. The same guys, who propounded Ayurveda were one of the first to do complex surgeries. But yes, I do not want to rant too much about it- I myself would not trust every ayurvedic hack.

You sound confused as well. You really think Ayurveda is non-scientific. The same guys, who propounded Ayurveda were one of the first to do complex surgeries. But yes, I do not want to rant too much about it- I myself would not trust every ayurvedic hack.

Click to expand...

No confusion here, but a scientific convention isn't really the place for such things. I could have perhaps also used some better examples of the things he objected to, but there were quite a few valid ones. Regardless of his reasons right or wrong, he should have chosen his words in a way that would have gotten his point across without making the nation as a whole look bad.

The western cultural attitude like almost everything else in the west is a result of 'secularization/generalization/de-theification' of christianity. Just like to a real Christian, a non-christian would always be evil, no matter whether his conduct is good or bad. The evil in abrahamism is not associated with values but it depends on the person's being within or without the sect.

Now in 'secularization' of this concept, the hate for 'heathens' is still there, but it's expressed not in the name of Christianity but in the name of 'western values'. So to a real 'believing' westerner a practicing Hindus is evil no matter what his conduct.

The only true god of christianity is replaced by only true progressive western culture, and anyone who doesn't follow the only true western way is evil heathen. If a woman is raped by a westerner it's an exception to wonderful western values, if a woman is raped by a Hindu it's because the whole Hindu culture is evil.

The west only understands one language, the universal language violence.

Violence is not only 'physical' it is simply what is used to achieve your means. Obviously physical violence is primal & highest however,

The op article is part of this

You can say we understand violence to mean standing up for ourselves.

Standing up for ourselves to mean, ruling all of Brahmand.

Ruling all of Brahmand to mean no Dharam that does not bow to Hindu Dharam (Sikh, Budh, Jain etc) can be allowed to exist.

No tribe which does not positively view the Aryas, Aryavarta & Arya Dharam can be allowed to exist.

Basically Bharat Varsh as Vishwamitr.

--
If you say this is savage, backwards

I ask you, is there is a world leader, why not us. Why someone else?

If say you do not believe in rulers, then be prepared to share your wives, daughters & homes with hostile strangers.

To us, Ksytria Dharam is the highest & ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ created the sword before the universe.

ਸਤਿਸ਼੍ਰੀਅਕਾਲ।।

Click to expand...

Your post is very strange to me. It sounds like you read some random words out of the sentences I posted and then started talking about many unrelated points.

1. Does the west care about its image? Yes absolutely, everyone does, it is absolutely foolish not to.

2. I never said don't stand up for yourselves or be weak. I never said don't use violence. What exactly are you arguing against?

All I said is Indians need to be mindful of their image in public. Try to make a good impression if you can, if it doesn't cost you much to do so. If I get into a fight with my family, I don't run out and do it in the front yard in front of the neighbors. Similarly, Indians need to chose their words and actions better and not run to the international press crying over every issue.

Your post is very strange to me. It sounds like you read some random words out of the sentences I posted and then started talking about many unrelated points.

1. Does the west care about its image? Yes absolutely, everyone does, it is absolutely foolish not to.

2. I never said don't stand up for yourselves or be weak. I never said don't use violence. What exactly are you arguing against?

All I said is Indians need to be mindful of their image in public. Try to make a good impression if you can, if it doesn't cost you much to do so. If I get into a fight with my family, I don't run out and do it in the front yard in front of the neighbors. Similarly, Indians need to chose their words and actions better and not run to the international press crying over every issue.

This has nothing to do with being secular.

Click to expand...

True, kind of did do that.

I see it as: the bollywood + BBC will ruin your image regardless. No need to engage them,

The other side, most of us will live in a neighborhood with other Hindus. This limits interaction with outside society so media will trash you regardless.

In the Hindu area the non Hindu women will like us, men hate us. That's simple facts:

You sound like you believe some 'peace' or compromise / alliance can be achieved with the west.

If maintenance of image furthers our interest of destroying them, good.
--
Not everyone cares about their image, even the try to make a good impression part.

It's implies treating a melech as your equal. We only care about others fearing us & our relatives being strong. We know that this, is a strong base for Bharat Ma.
--
I'm just debating but, they should be at our feet. Why care what they think, if there's nothing in it for us. They're not our friends, they're walking corpses.

The only true god of christianity is replaced by only true progressive western culture, and anyone who doesn't follow the only true western way is evil heathen. If a woman is raped by a westerner it's an exception to wonderful western values, if a woman is raped by a Hindu it's because the whole Hindu culture is evil.

Click to expand...

Pulpit mentality. All these liberalism/feminism/communisms and other such moral monotheisms feed superiority complex/self righteousness/moral high ground. Us vs Them. Look at everything in binary true-false. Jan Assman calls its mosaic distinction. Tacitus called it Odium generis humani.

Pulpit mentality. All these liberalism/feminism/communisms and other such moral monotheisms feed superiority complex/self righteousness/moral high ground. Us vs Them. Look at everything in binary true-false. Jan Assman calls its mosaic distinction. Tacitus called it Odium generis humani.

Challenge any progressive idea and you'll quickly see how tolerant they are.

Click to expand...

Assmann made some good arguments about what he called 'Mosaic Distinction' in his book about Moses but then someone said he was being 'anti-semitic'. This made him such a mumbling pathetic figure that in his later books he claimed that how he wasn't criticizing this 'Mosaic distinction' and how much he admires it and considers it to be a wonderful 'progressive' event in history of humanity. Freedom of speech at work.

Assmann made some good arguments about what he called 'Mosaic Distinction' in his book about Moses but then someone said he was being 'anti-semitic'. This made him such a mumbling pathetic figure that in his later books he claimed that how he wasn't criticizing this 'Mosaic distinction' and how much he admires it and considers it to be a wonderful 'progressive' event in history of humanity. Freedom of speech at work.

Click to expand...

Can't blame him to be honest. He is up against some very powerful forces.

In short, they hate any non-christians whether rioting, peaceful or just living and breathing. Just in case any stupid Hindus think that these people's hate for Muslims is love for Hindus.

Click to expand...

Hatred for muslims is evident. Hatred for Hindus comes from our success in western countries. These freaks who can't do anything for themselves are jealous of Indians taking their jobs and being successful at almost everything they do over there.